[AfriNIC-rpd] Definitions of LIR versus End User

[Nii Narku Quaynor]

Andrew,

Why not focus on agreeing on LIR and end-user?

Nii

On Jul 23, 2012, at 13:12, Andrew Alston <alston.networks at gmail.com> wrote:

> No, the attempt was not necessarily to set fees, the attempt was to analyse the gap between PIR and LIR fees and see if they are disproportionate in the communities view, so that we can request the board to look at this and make an adjustment with a well thought out motivation for the request for review.
> 
> I believe that if we are going to ask the board for a fee adjustment we need to tell them as a community how we view this, and give them solid reasons for it, and we cannot do that without discussion and information,  The final numbers are the boards to decide, but direction from the community is just as important.
> 
> Andrew
> 
> On 23 Jul 2012, at 2:59 PM, Nii Narku Quaynor wrote:
> 
>> Board sets fees; we discuss policy. The note was an attempt to set fees?
>> 
>> On Jul 23, 2012, at 12:48, Jackson Muthili <jacksonmuthi at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Nii Narku Quaynor <quaynor at ghana.com> wrote:
>>> Perhaps the board has heard loud and clearly. We might at this point leave the board to do their job ?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> What is the board job in context of this discussion?
>>> 
>>> Cheers
>>> JM
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> On Jul 23, 2012, at 11:40, Andrew Alston <alston.networks at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Guys,
>>>> 
>>>> Let me just state, that I do not think there would be any problem to potentially raising the fees for an end user on an annual basis.  For example, if you went from $100/$200 a year to even $1000 a year, its still in the reasonable range.  I would argue that the difference between LIR and End User though is currently excessive.  If we raised the end user fees and dropped the LIR fees to perhaps make a more inclusive fee structure, maybe thats the answer.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> That is one of the reasons why I have asked AfriNIC for the statistics in a previous email, so that we can do a proper analysis of where the revenue that is required is being generated from, and then perhaps can discuss how this could be moved around to a way that the community is happy with.
>>>> 
>>>> Andrew
>>>> 
>>>> On 23 Jul 2012, at 1:21 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hello SF,
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Sunday Folayan <sfolayan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> http://www.afrinic.net/index.php/en/library/membership-documents/273-membership-fees 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Perhaps you just focused on the setup costs. My statement (Annual fee) stands.
>>>>>  
>>>>> Yes you are right i did looked at something different as i assumed there was really no issue with the current pricing for the end-user. So i was looking at the pricing that Institutions will be paying if they were now categorized as an LIR.
>>>>> 
>>>>> From the structure you reference, /24 PI should pay $100 annually. /16 is also expected to pay $100. It is >/16 to /14 that progresses to $200.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I think $100/$200 annual payment is not the biggest and unbearable part of the end-user's current pricing :-)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Seun Ojedeji,
>>>>> Federal University Oye-Ekiti
>>>>> web:      http://www.fuoye.edu.ng
>>>>> Mobile: +2348035233535
>>>>> alt email: seun.ojedeji at fuoye.edu.ng
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> rpd mailing list
>>>>> rpd at afrinic.net
>>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> rpd mailing list
>>>> rpd at afrinic.net
>>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rpd mailing list
>>> rpd at afrinic.net
>>> https://lists.afrinic.net/mailman/listinfo.cgi/rpd
>>> 
>>> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.afrinic.net/pipermail/rpd/attachments/20120723/2e11e93b/attachment.html>